lotrfandomcom-20200223-history
User talk:Toughpigs
-- 19:24, 19 September 2007 (UTC) Desysop Hi Danny! I was wondering whether you have the power to desysop, because we have three sysops who have never contributed anything in the time I’ve been here and I consider them a bit of a security risk having all those powers. If so could you desysop, FireBird, Jasca Ducato, and Duke Starhopper; I feel the attitude of the latter two was to experiment what it is like to be an admin, however they did not take their responsibility seriously. Thanks!-- 16:51, 27 May 2008 (UTC) ::Thanks! It's good to have you here!-- 11:36, 28 May 2008 (UTC) Edits HI Danny, I was looking through the Recent changes page and I was shocked to find that you've blanked many of our maintence; I've felt them necessary, but if you have reasons for why they've been blanked, then I'll happily get my bot to remove the templates from any pages which have it. Also I was shocked over how all of our chapters articles have been redirected to the corresponding book page; again I've always felt them necessary despite there shortness in length and they play a big part in our collection of portals. Despite my concerns keep up the good work!-- 15:25, 5 June 2008 (UTC) :Hi! I'm sorry, I was under the impression that you guys were kind of taking off. TheGreyPilgrim said, "My opinion is that the One Wiki's best editors will move to TG, and new people can then come to this site and take their place." I didn't want the site to just drift away and go dead, so we're spotlighting the wiki right now, and attracting some new editors. :One of the concerns that was raised in the merge vote discussion was that this wiki doesn't have a lot of good articles. I think that actually there are tons of good articles, but they're hard to see, because they're overshadowed by lots of stubs. When a new user hits random page right now, they're more likely to get a one-sentence stub or a disambiguation page than a strong article. :So we're merging some of the stubs into bigger articles -- making one great article instead of 30 unimpressive ones. The chapter articles are repeating pieces from the main novel pages. The pages for years are all one or two-line articles that could be combined into big timeline pages. Etc. :For the templates, I think they may be discouraging people from editing. We're finding that "failure boxes" are just depressing. If a new reader sees that 50% of the pages have big boxes that point out how flawed the article is, it doesn't fill them with confidence. It's obvious which pages are short, or which pages don't have images. So overall, it's often better to let people find what they want to work on without hitting them over the head with the wiki's flaws. :Anyway, if you're still going to be around, that's awesome -- I think there's going to be a lot of great movement happening here soon. Let me know what you'd like to see happen! -- Danny (talk) 17:27, 5 June 2008 (UTC) Thanks Thanks for the welcome! I've been going through the wiki so much I didn't have time to right you back!--The dark marshal 15:03, 21 March 2009 (UTC)